National Australia Bank v Hookham [2015] NSWSC 763

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: National Australia Bank v Hookham [2015] NSWSC 763 Hearing dates: 12 June 2015 Date of orders: 12 June 2015 Decision date: 12 June 2015 Before: Garling J Decision: (1)Order 1 in the Notice of Motion filed 12 June 2015 is refused. (2)Stand over the balance of the Motion to 9.00am on Monday 22 June 2015 before the Registrar. Catchwords: PROCEDURE – civil – application to restrain sale of property – applicant not registered proprietor of property – applicant claims equitable interest in property – no prima facie case that bank not entitled to exercise power of sale – balance of convenience favours sale of property Legislation Cited: Real Property Act 1900 Cases Cited: Not Applicable Texts Cited: Not Applicable Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: National Australia Bank (P) Sheryl Robyn Hookham (D) Representation: Counsel: N Cosgrove (P) In person (D) File Number(s): 2014/272975 Publication restriction: Not Applicable

___________________________________________________________________

ex tempore Judgment

An Urgent Application 1. This is an application made urgently by Sheryl Robyn Hookham, who is the second defendant and cross claimant in proceedings brought in this court by the National Australia Bank ("the Bank") seeking an order that an auction sale of a property at Halcrows Road, Glenorie, scheduled for 6pm this evening, not proceed.

The Proceedings 1. The proceedings, brought in this Court against Mr and Mrs Hookham, assert default by Mr and Mrs Hookham under the terms of two loans and two mortgages. The Statement of Claim claims that the total of the default is about $2.6 million. The Bank claims an entitlement to possession of two properties owned by Mr and Mrs Hookham on Old Northern Road, Glenorie. 2. On 5 June 2015, the defendants filed a Defence to the proceedings and a Cross-Claim. In the Cross-Claim, Mrs Hookham asserts that the conduct of the Bank has been such as to give rise to a cause of action, or causes of action, which will result in significant damages in her favour. The total sum of damages claimed, at this very early stage of the Cross-Claim, appears to be a sum a little less than $20 million. 3. There is no question in these proceedings, and Mrs Hookham accepts, that if the Cross-Claim proceeds and the Bank is ordered to pay damages to Mr and Mrs Hookham, that it has the financial capacity to meet any judgment likely to be given.